Why Col. L. Fletcher Prouty's Critics Are Wrong

[Sandy Larsen]

54 minutes ago, Michael Griffith said:

The roster of guests, taken from promotional notices, who appeared on Liberty Lobby's radio programs "Radio Free America" or "Editor's Roundtable" in a six-year period, between 1990-1995, gives an idea of the variety and breadth of Carto's constituency. A sampling includes: . . . .

          Col. L. Fletcher Prouty, now-deceased conspiracy theorist and longtime Liberty Lobby associate; reported consultant on Oliver Stone's film "JFK." (7/6/91, 12/18/91, 1/10/92, 11/17/92, 6/24/93, 3/9/94, 3/12/94, 11/29/94, 4/13/95, 6/27/95) (Willis-Carto-Extremism-in-America.pdf (adl.org)

Here are some of the other "guests" who appeared on the show, as listed in the ADL article:

James Warner, organizer for George Lincoln Rockwell's American National Socialist Party in the 1960s and longtime Louisiana-based Identity leader. (11/13/91)

Fred Leuchter, who claimed that the Auschwitz gas chambers were postwar hoaxes; his findings have become a standard text in the Holocaust-denial movement. (2/15/91, 12/23/91)

Deirdre Fields, wife of California neo-National Socialist Joe Fields and champion of South African apartheid (she is a South African native), focused on the "Jewish influence" in South Africa. (10/28/91, 2/20/92, 3/19/92, 4/20/93, 12/10/93)

Ernst Zundel, one of the leading Holocaust deniers and a major distributor of National Socialist and neo-National Socialist propaganda and memorabilia. (4/18/91, 9/9/92)

 

So if forum member and attorney Lawrence Schnapf sits down with Tucker Carlson for an interview, are you going to group him with all the crazy people Tucker has on as guests?

I don't think you should do so. But it is because of people who think like you do that I warned against Lawrence appearing on the show. That people against Lawrence's cause will use the interview against him, just like you are using Prouty's association with Liberty Lobby against him.

Thank goodness we have level-headed, rational people who can see past this associative nonsense.

 

[Kirk Gallaway]

I have no idea about the extent of involvement with Fletcher Prouty and the Liberty Lobby. All I've ever heard here about the Liberty Lobby is their successful win in court against E.Howard Hunt. But I had some exposure to their newsletter, as a teenager.  They sent their newsletter, the Spotlight out to my Dad, who was a Republican. I read it  and I did remember language about international money conspiracies and some sort of veiled Anti Semitism. It was my first sort of contact with that. The next such contact I remember that struck me as similar was Lyndon La Rouche, but with colorful, tabloid  stories  about powerful politicians. These guys clearly weren't good guys. Just because they beat E. Howard Hunt about being in Dallas, doesn't mean they're good guys and more than a super MAGA induced new JFK convert like Roger Stone is.

They probably don't wheel out there big knives on their publication, but use it to draw in people to come to their forums.

I do have an anecdotal story. I remember as a teenager, the Spotlight came out with a front page headline claiming the Beatles were steering youth toward Communism , specifically with their song, "Back in the U.S.S.R". That told me very overtly these guys were wacko. I mentioned it to my Dad, and he concurred that that is what he thought too.

It's one thing to banish somebody because of an early association. That was done time and time again in the Mc Carthy hearings. But for a log standing association, should that exist , it is relevant as to his judgment. Just like I'm waiting to see RFK Jr.,  apart from clearing up  his vaccine position, quickly and  thoroughly renounce any association with Roger Stone,or Steve Banon,  IMO for example.

If someone had a long term association with a group like the Liberty Lobby and didn't know any of the major tenants of that organization's belief system. Like a sort of sleepwalking Reagan, that isn't good either.

P.S. Sandy, Bill Maher is also going to do an interview with Tucker Carlson. Though Carlson's producers wanted to just talk about stuff they both agree about, and Maher refused. I don't think Larry will have any of that problem. How could anybody not want to see more people from the opposite ideology come on Carlson's show?  But long term associations with nut job organizations, if that in fact did happen, without a thorough explanation why, did he really explain ? Are not to be wholly dismissed. Of course that doesn't mean that everything he says should be dismissed whole cloth. But these are all factors that must be taken in account to determine someone's credibility.

[Sandy Larsen]

4 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

It's one thing to banish somebody because of an early association. That was done time and time again in the Mc Carthy hearings. But for a log standing association, should that exist , it is relevant as to his judgment. ....

If someone had a long term association with a group like the Liberty Lobby and didn't know any of the major tenants of that organization's belief system. Like a sort of sleepwalking Reagan, that isn't good either.

 

Kirk,

Do you think that Mitt Romney's credibility or judgement should be questioned because he associates (constantly!) with the Republican Party, half of whose members think it is okay to illegally overturn an election?

 

[Kirk Gallaway]

Yes in fact I do make judgments about Mitt Romney and his historic ties to Corporate America. But as far as his credentials, he is consistent in that he's a long time member of Congress and ran for the Presidency, and he has dreams of taking his party back.

It's like in this forum. To the vast majority here, there are 2 groups, pro JFK conspiracy and LNers. I'm aligned with former. But that doesn't matter so much to me, I separate it into 2 categories, those who want to have an intellectually honest discussion and those who run away from it.

Sandy, it sounds like you're assuming to know the various factions that supposedly once existed in the Liberty Lobby, and that Prouty's politics could only be  respectable?

[Ron Bulman]

7 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

W, yes Liberty Lobby won against E. Howard Hunt.  They had Mark Lane as their attorney, he discusses the case in Plausible Denial.  The jury concluded not only that Hunt had not been defamed by Liberty Lobby/Spotlight, but, that The CIA had killed John F Kennedy and that Hunt had participated in the assassination.

So, one might say Hunt was convicted by a jury of participating in the Assassination of JFK.  The only conviction of anyone in the case I know of.

[Kirk Gallaway]

6 minutes ago, Ron Bulman said:

So, one might say Hunt was convicted by a jury of participating in the Assassination of JFK.  The only conviction of anyone in the case I know of.

So I was wondering if that could be said Ron. So I investigated a little and found out things I didn't remember at first.

 

Hunt sued Liberty Lobby – but not the Sunday News Journal – for libel. Liberty Lobby stipulated, in this first trial, that the question of Hunt's alleged involvement in the assassination would not be contested. Hunt prevailed and was awarded $650,000 damages.

I assume only a handful of people here know that. I had forgotten. But in the second Liberty Lobby lawsuit Lane does some excellent cross examining of Hunt. I remember this now, involving his kids..

Then lane ties Hunt to Marita Lorenz's story, even though it should be mentioned, for whatever it's worth, the HSCA had previously discarded her story, though Blakey, obviously was never interested in tying the CIA to the JFKA.

 

But in the retrial, it is critical to establish Liberty Lobby had malice. And Liberty Lobby won.

To support his position, Lane cites jury Foreperson Leslie Armstrong. Lane describes Armstrong’s statements to the media as follows:Juror Armstrong said:The evidence was clear, she said. The CIA had killed President Kennedy. Hunt had been part of it, and that evidence, so painstakingly presented should now be examined by the relevant institutions of the United States government so that those responsible for the assassination might be brought to justice.

Armstrong apparently did say that, and doubtless believed it. But there were five other jurors. Two of them told the Miami Herald that they most certainly did not believe that Lane had proven that Hunt was a conspirator. Suzanne Reach said that “We were very disgusted and felt it was trash . . . . The paper published material that was sloppy – but it wasn’t malicious.” Reach added that “We were worried that our verdict might give the wrong impression to the public” and added that Lane’s conspiracy theories were “absolutely not” the reason for the verdict.

The Herald also quoted another juror, who refused to be identified, saying that the verdict was the result of Hunt failing to demonstrate that the article was published with “reckless disregard for the truth,” and added that Lane’s conspiracy theories were “so much extraneous matter.”

Thus, depending on whether the unidentified juror in the Miami Herald story is the same person as the juror quoted by the Associated Press, three or four of the six jurors went on record as denying Lane’s claims to have proven a conspiracy.

 

Anyway, interesting link.

https://www.jfk-assassination.net/denial.htm

[Sandy Larsen]

1 hour ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

Yes in fact I do make judgments about Mitt Romney and his historic ties to Corporate America. But as far as his credentials, he is consistent in that he's a long time member of Congress and ran for the Presidency, and he has dreams of taking his party back.

 

In drawing up that analogy, I changed the name to Mitt Romney at the last moment without testing it, and I see now that doing so was a mistake.... it doesn't work. (In addition, I meant to say credibility, not credentials.) I will restate that analogy with the original name I had in mind in a moment.

 

1 hour ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

Sandy, it sounds like you're assuming to know the various factions that supposedly once existed in the Liberty Lobby, and that Prouty's politics could only be  respectable?

 

I read about Liberty Lobby in Wikipedia and found that they were a far-right organization and that they denied being anti-Semitic. I also found that their publications had some anti-Semitic articles. So I figured they probably had some anti-Semitic members, but weren't all anti-Semitic.

As for Prouty's "politics," I have seen nothing indicating he is anti-Semitic. So naturally I assume that he isn't. 

 

Okay, so here is my corrected question for you:

Roughly half the Republican Party think it is okay to illegally overthrow an election. Do you think that Congressman Mike Bost's*  credibility and judgement should be questioned because he associates (constantly!) with the Republicans?

 

*This can be ANY Republican congressman whose opinions toward 1/6/21 MAGA activities are unknown to us.

 

[Michael Griffith]

Until yesterday, I assumed that everyone in this forum knew the basic facts about Liberty Lobby and their founder Willis Carto, with whom Prouty had a long-term relationship. Sadly and surprisingly, yesterday I discovered that this is not the case. I will now present more evidence that Liberty Lobby was guilty of Holocaust denial, anti-Semitism, racism, and white supremacy. 

This evidence comes from the decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for DC on Liberty Lobby's appeal of a district court's rejection on their libel lawsuit. Liberty Lobby sued the Wall Street Journal for calling them anti-Semitic, and they lost big time. The case was heard in the DC District Court. Liberty Lobby then appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for DC, and lost there as well. Here are some damning and revealing excerpts from the Court of Appeals' decision:

          On July 10, 1986, the district court issued its memorandum opinion and order, granting appellees' motions and dismissing Liberty Lobby's complaint with prejudice. . . .

          The district court went on to hold that, to the extent the charge of anti-Semitism had any objectively verifiable factual content, the statement was substantially true. Relying upon the contents of a multivolume file Liberty Lobby kept on publications about Jews  and upon the views expounded in Liberty Lobby's official organ, The Spotlight, the district court found that appellees' "evidence of Liberty Lobby's institutional anti-Semitism in its most malign sense" was "compelling." With only the bald denial of the affidavit of Willis Carto, Liberty Lobby's founder and chief executive officer, weighing against appellees' evidence, the district court concluded that no reasonable jury could find by a preponderance of the evidence that the ascription of anti-Semitism to Liberty Lobby was false. Id. at 1153. 

          The district court also found that dismissal of Liberty Lobby's claims based on the Jaroslovsky article was mandated by the complete lack of evidence that any of the allegedly defamatory statements were published with actual malice. The court noted that Jaroslovsky had spent three months on intermittent research, had reviewed a large number of Liberty Lobby documents, and had consulted various articles about Liberty Lobby. Jaroslovsky had shown these materials to his editor, who concurred in his judgment that Liberty Lobby was anti-Semitic. The Journal's Washington bureau chief, who was familiar with Liberty Lobby's radio program and its official publication, The Spotlight, agreed. . . .

          We find, however, that these statements about Liberty Lobby's publishing activities [that Liberty Lobby had published Pearson's theories of racial supremacy and genetic selection, and that these publications were sold by an American National Socialist organization] are nonactionable as a matter of federal constitutional law for two reasons. First, we are convinced that no reasonable jury could find by a fair preponderance of the evidence that these statements are false. . . .

          It is undisputed that both Western Destiny and the Pearson books mentioned in the Jaroslovsky article were published by an unincorporated entity located in Torrance, California, doing business as The Noontide Press [the publishing arm of the Holocaust-denying IHR, one of Liberty Lobby's sister organizations]. See Affidavit of Robert P. LoBue, E.N. 57, p 85 (filed Dec. 16, 1985) [hereinafter "LoBue Aff."].  The record evidence that both Mr. Carto and Liberty Lobby exercise substantial financial and editorial control over the publishing activities of Noontide is, in our view, compelling. . . .

          Until a fire in 1984, Liberty Lobby and The Noontide Press shared office space in Torrance, California. See Carto Dep. at 474. During the 1960's, when the Pearson books were published, Mr. Carto was a board member of The Legion, the incorporated entity behind Noontide Press. See Carto Dep. at 300-03. Mr. Bruce Hollman, a Liberty Lobby director, also sat on The Legion's board at the time of the publications at issue. See id. at 301. At the same time, Mr. Robert Kuttner, listed as a contributing editor of Western Destiny, was also a member of Liberty Lobby's Board of Directors. Id. at 120. During this time, Roger Pearson was the editor of Western Destiny, and Mr. Carto, under the pseudonym "E.L. Anderson," was its sole associate editor. See Plaintiff's Answer to Defendants' First Set of Interrogatories, E.N. 9, at 15 (filed Feb. 28, 1985) (admitting that "E.L. Anderson" is a pseudonym for Mr. Carto). . . .

          Even if a reasonable jury could find that Jaroslovsky and his editors falsely exaggerated Liberty Lobby's role in the dissemination of the Pearson books and Western Destiny, no jury could find that they did so with knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for truth. After over a year of discovery, Liberty Lobby has not been able to adduce a scintilla of evidence indicating that anyone involved in the preparation of the Pearson article entertained any doubt about its veracity.

          To the contrary, appellees' evidence reveals that Jaroslovsky thoroughly documented his story and relied upon wholly reputable sources in drawing the connection between Liberty Lobby and Noontide's publishing activities. Among Jaroslovsky's sources was a June 1980 issue of the Facts newsletter published by the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith ("ADL"). See Deposition of Richard Jaroslovsky, E.N. 32 & 33, exh. 45 (filed Aug. 6, 1985) [hereinafter "Jaroslovsky Dep."]; The Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith, "The Spotlight: Liberty Lobby's Voice of Hate," Facts, vol. 26, No. 1 (June, 1980). Under the subtitle "Front for Anti-Semitism," the article states:

          "For almost a quarter century, Liberty Lobby has served as a front for Carto's seamier operations and activities. Among these have been ... Western Destiny, a magazine that published racist, National Socialist-tinged articles extolling the Nordic mystique; and Noontide Press, publisher of anti-Semitic, racist, and pro-National Socialist books...."

          We turn next to the charge of anti-Semitism, leveled against Liberty Lobby in the Jaroslovsky article and reported as the subject of a lawsuit in the Garment column. The district court suggested that the term "anti-Semitic" as used by Jaroslovsky is probably a constitutionally protected statement of opinion. The court went on to say that if "anti-Semitism" were regarded as an "objectively verifiable fact," it was amply proved against Liberty Lobby in this case. . . .

          Both Noontide Press and the Institute for Historical Review ("IHR") are trade names for an incorporated entity known as The Legion for the Survival of Freedom, Inc. ("The Legion"). In Mermelstein, the plaintiffs brought suit against Liberty Lobby, The Legion, Noontide, the IHR and Mr. Carto, among others. The suit was based upon the IHR's offer of a $50,000 reward to anyone who could prove that the Holocaust had actually occurred. The offer received extensive publicity in Liberty Lobby's publications. See LoBue Aff. paragraphs 218, 220. The Mermelstein plaintiffs evidently submitted such proof and claimed the reward. Upon the IHR's refusal to honor its offer, the plaintiffs instituted an action for breach of contract and intentional infliction of emotional distress. See LoBue Aff., exh. 14 (transcript of proceedings in Mermelstein v. Institute for Historical Review, No. C 356 542 (July 22, 1985). The case was settled with the defendants, including Liberty Lobby, agreeing to publish a formal apology and to pay the plaintiffs $150,000 in damages. See LoBue Aff., exh. 14, at 4-13. . . .

          Liberty Lobby has brought a number of libel suits against media defendants that have characterized it as racially prejudiced or anti-Semitic. . . . None of these suits has been successful and in no instance has Liberty Lobby been allowed to present its claims to a jury. (https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/838/1287/281667/)

I recommend reading the entire decision. Among other things, it takes note of the numerous falsehoods in Liberty Lobby's appeal. It also delves more deeply into Liberty Lobby's close relationship with the IHR, the Noontide Press, and white supremacists.

Again, your beloved L. Fletcher Prouty lined up to be a character witness for Liberty Lobby founder Willis Carto, sat on one of Liberty Lobby's boards, spoke at one of their conferences, appeared numerous times on their radio show, blamed Israeli Jews for the high price of oil, and recommended that people read Liberty Lobby's newspaper The Spotlight.

Finally, just this morning, I stumbled across the fact that Prouty claimed that the Joint Chiefs of Staff were involved with the Jonestown mass suicide. He claimed that the Joint Chiefs prepared air shipments of hundreds of body bags beforehand because they had advance knowledge of it, and he implied that U.S. inteligence was also involved. Think I'm kidding? Let me quote him:

          “The Joint Chiefs of Staff had prepared air shipments of hundreds of body bags. They didn’t normally keep that many in any one place. Within hours, they began to shuttle them down to Georgetown, the main city. They couldn’t possibly have done that without prior knowledge that it was going to happen. It shows that there was prior planning. . . .

          “We would provide the agency with the things they were requesting, without any questions. That’s the way the business works. . . .

          “The JCS wouldn’t have moved at all on their own. . . . They didn’t give a damn about Jonestown. . . . [These] are the kinds of earmarks that define the hand of American intelligence.” (https://www.freedommag.org/english/vol29i4/page10.htm)

Edited April 13, 2023 by Michael Griffith

[Paul Brancato]

Surely didn’t know Prouty said that about the JCS and Jonestown. Not to derail too much, my reading of Jim Jones is that he was connected to US Intel in some way. But that’s a stretch. I don’t know what Prouty’s reasons are for asserting that Israel was somehow responsible for the high price of oil - sounds wacky - but it’s not anti-Semitic in and of itself to criticize Israel’s actions is it? Did you find any statements more directly anti-Semitic? 
Again, I don’t think anyone disputes that Liberty Lobby or Willa Carto were Holocaust deniers and anti-Semitic in the worst sense. The question is whether Prouty was as well. 

[Michael Griffith]

It is worth noting that Prouty publicly praised both Willis Carto and Tom Marcellus of the Holocaust-denying IHR for having the "guts and good sense" to republish his book The Secret Team. Prouty even publicly stated that it was an "enormous privilege" to have the IHR republish his book. The IHR republished the book through its publishing arm, the Noontide Press. To get some idea of how sleazy and despicable the IHR is, here are a few links:

https://www.muckrock.com/foi/united-states-of-america-10/institute-for-historical-review-ihr-31231/
EXCERPT:

          IHR's first annual conference in 1979 attracted deniers from around the world and helped to introduce some key American extremists to Holocaust denial. David Duke, the neo-National Socialist who was then the national leader of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, was so taken with the idea that he followed up the conference with a "Special Holocaust Edition" of his Crusader newspaper. In the same way, National Socialist Party of America leader Frank Collin enthusiastically embraced denial, saying, "There was no Holocaust, but they deserve one — and will get it." For years, IHR's yearly conferences were key events that offered networking opportunities for neo-National Socialists and anti-Semites from around the world.

https://politicalresearch.org/1994/09/19/encountering-holocaust-denial
EXCERPT:

          A January 1994 Gallup Poll found that approximately 4 percent of those it surveyed “have real doubts about the Holocaust; the others (19 percent) are just insecure about their historical knowledge or won’t believe anything they have not experienced themselves,” says Frank Newport, Editor of the Gallup Poll.

         Contrary to popular belief, Holocaust denial exists not only on the political right, but also among some individuals characterized as moderate or left, although it is the right that is most prominent in the effort to present “another side” to Holocaust history. Most obvious on the right are the predictable suspects: neo-National Socialists, skinheads, and members of the various Ku Klux Klans. The most prominent revisionist organizations are the Institute for Historical Review (IHR) and the Liberty Lobby, publisher of Spotlight, a radical right-wing newspaper published in Washington, DC. . . .

          The chief organization promoting Holocaust denial is the Institute for Historical Review (IHR), a California organization founded in 1978 by Willis Carto, who also founded the extreme right-wing Liberty Lobby. IHR styles itself in fundraising letters as a “voice for historical truth” and a “champion of historical knowledge” because “we have the knowledge, and because we have the determination to see the truth prevail". . . .

          IHR first came to public attention in 1980, when it offered a $50,000 reward to anyone who could conclusively prove that Jews had been gassed at Auschwitz. Mel Mermelstein, a survivor, accepted the challenge and submitted voluminous proof, including his own personal testimony. When the evidence was ignored by IHR, Mermelstein sued IHR for the reward.

          During the trial, Mermelstein used the same evidence that had been submitted to IHR. The suit was finally settled in Mermelstein’s favor in July 1985, with IHR ordered by the Los Angeles Superior Court to pay the $50,000 reward plus an additional $40,000 for pain and suffering caused to Mermelstein. According to a member of the staff of the Auschwitz Study Foundation, founded by Mermelstein in Huntington Beach, California, IHR did, in fact, pay the judgment. . . .

          Often those who get involved with IHR are unaware of its historic connection to Liberty Lobby, a connection which IHR itself is slow to reveal, presumably for the sake of its credibility. Indeed, only Liberty Lobby publicizes the connection, often publishing Holocaust revisionism in Spotlight and even devoting entire issues of that newspaper to the “Holocaust hoax.” In addition, Noontide Press, a Carto/Liberty Lobby outfit, has been run in previous years by Tom Marcellus, current director of IHR. Fundraising letters for IHR have been printed on Noontide Press stationery; both organizations are usually based in the same California cities. If IHR moves, so does Noontide.

http://www.faqs.org/faqs/holocaust/ihr/part2/
EXCERPT:

          Col. L. Fletcher Prouty has maintained a strong relationship with the Liberty Lobby for years. During the lengthy legal battles surrounding the Mermelstein lawsuits against the Liberty Lobby and Willis A. Carto, Prouty and fellow PAC advisory board member Lt. Col. James "Bo" Gritz were "prepared to testify as character witnesses on behalf of Liberty Lobby founder Willis A. Carto" (Spotlight, 10-7-91, 12).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_for_Historical_Review

https://www.auschwitz.org/en/history/holocaust-denial/the-institute-for-historical-review/

Edited April 13, 2023 by Michael Griffith

[Sandy Larsen]

12 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said:

Again, I don’t think anyone disputes that Liberty Lobby or Willa Carto were Holocaust deniers and anti-Semitic in the worst sense. The question is whether Prouty was as well.

 

Paul,

I dispute that Liberty Lobby was overtly an anti-Semitic organization. Its founder Willis Carto was. In the court cases Michael cited, the courts basically declared that Liberty Lobby could be treated as being anti-Semitic because it promoted a lot of Carto's publication that were indeed anti-Semitic.

I contend that most likely there were numerous members of Liberty Lobby who were far-right but not anti-Semitic. And that Liberty Lobby itself wasn't known to be anti-Semitic.

Had it been known that Liberty Lobby was anti-Semitic, then why is it that Liberty Lobby bothered with suing those news publishers that claimed Liberty Lobby was anti-Semitic?

Had it been known that Liberty Lobby was anti-Semitic, then why is it that investigations were conducted to find evidence indicating that it indeed was?

Had it been known that Liberty Lobby was anti-Semitic, then why is it they were invited to contribute to a Congressional report? ("The Role of Gold in the Domestic and International Monetary Systems" , search for Liberty Lobby.)

Had it been known that Liberty Lobby was anti-Semitic, then why is it that C-SPAN chose to broadcast a Liberty-Lobby hosted speech given by a former Mossad agent? ("Mossad Influence on U.S. Policy" .)

And on and on.

 

[Paul Brancato]

1 minute ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Paul,

I dispute that Liberty Lobby was overtly an anti-Semitic organization. Its founder Willis Carto was. In the court cases Michael cited, the courts basically declared that Liberty Lobby could be treated as being anti-Semitic because it promoted a lot of Carto's publication that were indeed anti-Semitic.

I contend that most likely there were numerous members of Liberty Lobby who were far-right but not anti-Semitic. And that Liberty Lobby itself wasn't known to be anti-Semitic.

Had it been known that Liberty Lobby was anti-Semitic, then why is it that Liberty Lobby bothered with suing those news publishers that claimed Liberty Lobby was anti-Semitic?

Had it been known that Liberty Lobby was anti-Semitic, then why is it that investigations were conducted to find evidence indicating that it indeed was?

Had it been known that Liberty Lobby was anti-Semitic, then why is it they were invited to contribute to a Congressional report? ("The Role of Gold in the Domestic and International Monetary Systems" , search for Liberty Lobby.)

Had it been known that Liberty Lobby was anti-Semitic, then why is it that C-SPAN chose to broadcast a Liberty-Lobby hosted speech given by a former Mossad agent? ("Mossad Influence on U.S. Policy" .)

And on and on.

 

Makes sense. Certainly true of Carto. I’ve never looked deeply at Liberty Lobby.

 

[W. Niederhut]

       I want to point out to Kirk, Ron, Sandy, Paul, and the forum that Michael Griffith has repeatedly highjacked this thread about Col. L. Fletcher Prouty's distinguished military career and his ground breaking revelations about CIA history, (in The Secret Team and JFK, the CIA, and Vietnam) in order to shift the focus to the Liberty Lobby.

      Michael has deployed the same old CIA/John McAdams propaganda tricks that have been used for the past 30 years to discredit Prouty's rare insights into CIA history, Vietnam, and the JFK assassination.

      As Gerry Patrick Hemming told Greg Burnham, (see the definitive history posts at the top of this thread) Fletcher Prouty was the only Deep State insider who ever came forward to spill the beans about CIA black ops and their putative relationship to the JFK assassination and Vietnam.

     So, it's understandable that the CIA and U.S. military establishment has put a great deal of effort into trying to smear and discredit Prouty's revelations.

     I will also point out that Michael Griffith has repeatedly attacked James DiEugenio's historigraphy about JFK's decision to get out of Vietnam in 1963.  Griffith even claimed recently that DiEugenio is "out of his depth on Vietnam."

     Here is Michael Griffith's Education Forum bio, which includes a stint at the Defense Language Institute in Monterey, California.

Michael T. Griffith holds a Master’s degree in Theology from The Catholic Distance University, a Graduate Certificate in Ancient and Classical History from American Military University, a Bachelor’s degree in Liberal Arts from Excelsior College, and two Associate in Applied Science degrees from the Community College of the Air Force.  He also holds an Advanced Certificate of Civil War Studies and a Certificate of Civil War Studies from Carroll College.  He is a graduate in Arabic and Hebrew of the Defense Language Institute in Monterey, California, and of the U.S. Air Force Technical Training School in San Angelo, Texas.  In addition, he has completed Advanced Hebrew programs at Haifa University in Israel and at the Spiro Institute in London, England.  He is the author of five books on Mormonism and ancient texts, including How Firm A Foundation, A Ready Reply, and One Lord, One Faith.  He is also the author of a book on the JFK assassination titled Compelling Evidence (JFK Lancer, 1996), and of a book on the Pearl Harbor attack titled The Real Infamy of Pearl Harbor (2021).

 

    

Edited April 13, 2023 by W. Niederhut

[Michael Griffith]

15 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Paul,

I dispute that Liberty Lobby was overtly an anti-Semitic organization.

This is just pitiful. This awful argument smacks of evasion. Of course Liberty Lobby would not admit they were anti-Semitic! Are you kidding me? But this does not change the fact that they were anti-Semitic and denied the Holocaust. That's one of the main reasons that both the DC District Court and the DC U.S. Court of Appeals ruled against them when they sued newspapers and journalists who identified them as anti-Semitic. I just provided a long extract from the Court of Appeals' decision that noted the fact that the evidence clearly showed that Liberty Lobby was anti-Semitic. 

You could also argue, "Gee, the IHR claims they do not deny the Holocaust, so they are not 'overt' Holocaust deniers!" Uh-huh. They've published numerous articles and books that deny the Holocaust, and they've hosted conferences that included pro-N-azis and proud Holocaust deniers as guest speakers. See the links in my previous reply for more damning information on the IHR.

Allow me to mention, again, that in the late 1970s, when I was in my early 20s, I personally attended a Liberty Lobby conference in Portland, Oregon, where the featured speaker argued that the Holocaust was a myth peddled by an alleged Zionist international conspiracy that was supposedly bent on ruling the world. This nutjob was paid by Liberty Lobby to go around the country giving this obscene presentation. 

Liberty Lobby's radio show included overt, unashamed Holocaust deniers, including one man (Fred Leuchter) who claimed that large numbers of Jews could not have been gassed at Auschwitz, and another man (Ernst Zundel) who was an open neo-N-azi, white supremacist, and Holocaust denier. 

It is just so pathetic that some of you won't face the ugly, documented truth about Liberty Lobby and the IHR because Fletcher Prouty closely associated with them for years, praised their leaders, and even had one of his books republished by their publishing arm.

Rather than reconsider your support for Prouty based on these disturbing facts, you bend over backward to deny them. 

 

[Sandy Larsen]

1 hour ago, Michael Griffith said:

It is worth noting that Prouty publicly praised both Willis Carto and Tom Marcellus of the Holocaust-denying IHR for having the "guts and good sense" to republish his book The Secret Team. Prouty even publicly stated that it was an "enormous privilege" to have the IHR republish his book. IHR republished the book through its publishing arm, the Noontide Press. To get some idea of how sleazy and despicable IHR is, here are a few links:

https://www.muckrock.com/foi/united-states-of-america-10/institute-for-historical-review-ihr-31231/
EXCERPT:

          IHR's first annual conference in 1979 attracted deniers from around the world and helped to introduce some key American extremists to Holocaust denial. David Duke, the neo-National Socialist who was then the national leader of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, was so taken with the idea that he followed up the conference with a "Special Holocaust Edition" of his Crusader newspaper. In the same way, National Socialist Party of America leader Frank Collin enthusiastically embraced denial, saying, "There was no Holocaust, but they deserve one — and will get it." For years, IHR's yearly conferences were key events that offered networking opportunities for neo-National Socialists and anti-Semites from around the world.

https://politicalresearch.org/1994/09/19/encountering-holocaust-denial
EXCERPT:

          A January 1994 Gallup Poll found that approximately 4 percent of those it surveyed “have real doubts about the Holocaust; the others (19 percent) are just insecure about their historical knowledge or won’t believe anything they have not experienced themselves,” says Frank Newport, Editor of the Gallup Poll.

         Contrary to popular belief, Holocaust denial exists not only on the political right, but also among some individuals characterized as moderate or left, although it is the right that is most prominent in the effort to present “another side” to Holocaust history. Most obvious on the right are the predictable suspects: neo-National Socialists, skinheads, and members of the various Ku Klux Klans. The most prominent revisionist organizations are the Institute for Historical Review (IHR) and the Liberty Lobby, publisher of Spotlight, a radical right-wing newspaper published in Washington, DC. . . .

          The chief organization promoting Holocaust denial is the Institute for Historical Review (IHR), a California organization founded in 1978 by Willis Carto, who also founded the extreme right-wing Liberty Lobby. IHR styles itself in fundraising letters as a “voice for historical truth” and a “champion of historical knowledge” because “we have the knowledge, and because we have the determination to see the truth prevail". . . .

          IHR first came to public attention in 1980, when it offered a $50,000 reward to anyone who could conclusively prove that Jews had been gassed at Auschwitz. Mel Mermelstein, a survivor, accepted the challenge and submitted voluminous proof, including his own personal testimony. When the evidence was ignored by IHR, Mermelstein sued IHR for the reward.

          During the trial, Mermelstein used the same evidence that had been submitted to IHR. The suit was finally settled in Mermelstein’s favor in July 1985, with IHR ordered by the Los Angeles Superior Court to pay the $50,000 reward plus an additional $40,000 for pain and suffering caused to Mermelstein. According to a member of the staff of the Auschwitz Study Foundation, founded by Mermelstein in Huntington Beach, California, IHR did, in fact, pay the judgment. . . .

          Often those who get involved with IHR are unaware of its historic connection to Liberty Lobby, a connection which IHR itself is slow to reveal, presumably for the sake of its credibility. Indeed, only Liberty Lobby publicizes the connection, often publishing Holocaust revisionism in Spotlight and even devoting entire issues of that newspaper to the “Holocaust hoax.” In addition, Noontide Press, a Carto/Liberty Lobby outfit, has been run in previous years by Tom Marcellus, current director of IHR. Fundraising letters for IHR have been printed on Noontide Press stationery; both organizations are usually based in the same California cities. If IHR moves, so does Noontide.

http://www.faqs.org/faqs/holocaust/ihr/part2/
EXCERPT:

          Col. L. Fletcher Prouty has maintained a strong relationship with the Liberty Lobby for years. During the lengthy legal battles surrounding the Mermelstein lawsuits against the Liberty Lobby and Willis A. Carto, Prouty and fellow PAC advisory board member Lt. Col. James "Bo" Gritz were "prepared to testify as character witnesses on behalf of Liberty Lobby founder Willis A. Carto" (Spotlight, 10-7-91, 12).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_for_Historical_Review

https://www.auschwitz.org/en/history/holocaust-denial/the-institute-for-historical-review/

 

Logical fallacies...

• Guilt by association.
• Appeal to emotion.
• Appeal to gibberish (several paragraphs of irrelevant data).

 

What Fletcher Prouty said about his association with Liberty Lobby:

Prouty denied having known of the racist and antisemitic associations of the Lobby, noted that he also spoke at a ceremony at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, and assured Oliver Stone "... that he was neither a racist nor an anti-Semite... but merely a writer in need of a platform."^{[citation needed]} In a response to an article about Prouty in Esquire, which he labeled a "character assassination," Stone lamented Prouty's association with the Liberty Lobby but questioned its relevance to Prouty's reliability as a source.^[29] In an obituary in The Guardian, Michael Carlson wrote that "[a]lthough Prouty himself never espoused such [anti-Semitic] beliefs, the connection enabled critics to dismiss his later writings."^[1]     (Source)